John 8:58

Ilvgrammta at aol.com Ilvgrammta at aol.com
Thu Dec 23 20:56:34 EST 1999


Dear Bill,

This post is intended for you and Charles Stevens. I will try to explain why 
I do not believe that you can make such assertions about either John 1:1 or 
8:58.

In a message dated 99-12-23 17:30:11 EST, wross at farmerstel.com writes:

<< John's Gospel begins with the following affirmation:
 
 John   1   1   EN ARCH HN O LOGOS KAI O LOGOS HN PROS TON QEON KAI QEOS HN O 
LOGOS
 John   1   2   OUTOS HN EN ARCH PROS TON QEON
 
 These should show us:
 
 * John was writing about a person that "was in the beginning"<<

I think that the Prologue makes it highly likely that John is writing about a 
person. Of course, not everyone would agree. But when John writes KAI hO 
LOGOS SARX EGENETO, he seems to clearly distinguish his LOGOS from that of 
the pre-Socratics, the Stoics, or Philo (as Augustine of Hippo observed). So 
I would voice my assent here, for what that's worth.


 >>* John believed this person was with God (and was God)<<

I think this proposition is a little harder to prove. While Jn 1:1c could 
certainly be understood in the way that you posit, it surely is not the only 
way the passage can be understood. In Wenham's grammar, we are told that the 
construction in Jn 1:1c can be understood to mean "God" or "a god" (though 
Wenham mistakenly writes that "a god" connotes polytheism). Based on grammar 
alone, one choice is as reasonable as the other. I strike a middle ground and 
think that it should be translated "a divine being," or "God of a sort" (as 
some German translations render this passage). But that may be due to my 
theological presuppositions. I am not telling you how you should understand 
this passage. I'm just trying to present the other side of matters. 
Concerning this passage, J.A.T. Robinson wrote:

"The Greek runs: KAI QEOS HN hO LOGOS. The so-called Authorized Version has: 
'And the Word was God.' This would indeed suggest the view that 'Jesus' and 
'God' were identical and interchangeable. But in Greek this would most 
naturally be represented by 'God' with the article, not QEOS but hO QEOS. But,
equally, St. John is not saying that Jesus is a 'divine' man, in the sense 
with which the ancient world was familiar or in the sense that Liberals spoke 
of him. That would be QEIOS. The Greek expression steers carefully between 
the two. It is impossible to represent it in a single English word, but the 
New English Bible, I believe, gets the sense pretty exactly with its 
rendering, 'And what God was, the Word was.' In other words, if one looked at 
Jesus, one saw God--for he who has seen me, has seen the Father . . . Through 
him, as through no one else, God spoke and God acted; when one met him one 
was met . . . by God" (Robinson 70-71).

 >>I think some are asking us to accept that this was just a common, natural 
idiomatic way of saying "I already was" or "I was appointed" but I think it 
is because:
 
 * it gives a dramatic, eternal "nowness" that, even in English, has
 tremendous beauty and power;<<

Could you please explain how Jn 8:58 does this?

>>* it alludes to the way YHWH revealed Himself, as the I AM;<<

I am personally suspect about this interpretation. There are too many other 
options, as S. Miller has pointed out. T.W. Manson understood this passage to 
say, "I am the Messiah." John L. Mckenzie has also written the following 
about Jn 8:58:

"Jesus asserts his own innocence and the vindication which the Father will 
give him. This leads to a clear assertion of preexistence and his life is 
threatened for the first time. The preexistent Messiah actually does appear 
in rabbinical literature; and it was also rabbinical belief that the 
patriarchs and Moses saw the Messiah in a vision" (Mckenzie 193-194).

So I think that it is quite possible Jesus was simply identifying himself as 
the Messiah in Jn 8:58--and the Jews knew it. Sure he provoked a heated 
response from his hearers. But this should not surprise us since Jesus 
claimed to antedate Abraham. This observation is made by K.L. Mckay in 
Expository Times. If you compare Ex. 3:14 and Jn 8:58, you will note some 
differences. An important being that god is not called EGW EIMI in Ex. 3:14, 
15. The appellation He is given is hO WN.

Sincerely,

Edgar Foster

Edgar Foster


 
 



More information about the B-Greek mailing list